Your views and ideas on forum areas and organization? (page 12)

AndDontCallMeShirley

Paris: However name calling is never appropriate. Refutation can be accomplished without name calling.

Like calling atheists a "pack of wolves"? Is that what you mean?

Separation into subforums would probably have prevented this kind of rancorous spirit on the forum. Personally I think the intolerance and lack of moderation are serious issues in this community. No other forum I've spent time on tolerates this kind of behavior.

disposable hero of hypocrisy

Hang on. Isn't it all about free and open discussion? Getting all sides to the story? Weighing up what people say for yourself? Not sectioning ourselves off to only speak with people that agree with us. That's what some of us are still coming OUT of.

But yes, we could be a little more civil to each other in the meantime. Christian/atheists sections is a bad idea in my opinion. We should just grow up and ignore name callers, get a thicker skin.

Paris

Like calling atheists a "pack of wolves " ? Is that what you mean? - shirley

Trying to think how I could have put this nicely - "like a pack of wolves" is what I said the meaning is hounding someone. Like demanding they answer your questions. Or using name calling directly at an INDIVIDUAL, or your right it could be a group, like refering to a whole group as: "bleat our endless baselesss claims without anyone challenging them or asking for evidence".

Heres the problem with this thread: This is clearly NOT a Democracy. Asking for our opinins, suggestions and input is like the Governing Body asking for your opinion. Simon apparently has the power, single-handly, and right, by his sole ownership, to banish, shun and ban anyone here, when and why, he so chooses, without any Democratic process, or even a judicial committee that might be made up of representatives of various persuasions. So it places everyone at his mercy. The banishment is opaque and not up for discussion. Its a disfellowshipping process.

The site presents itself as a refuge for disallusioned ex-witnesses to find safe haven. It is also presenting itself as a public forum. And is supported by Advertisers who place Ads here. The greater the number of participants the greater the income to the owner. So we are all volunteer workers to this end. When I arrived here, shortly after I was accused of being villagegirl and called vindictive girl and vg and hounded. I looked up this person up and she is still listed as a Member in good standing, and her posts are all here by the hundreds. Cofty said she was "banned" and seemed to dislike her greatly. I wondered why she still is listed as a Member ? and then it occured to me, her "dead body" serves as a statistic to boost the numbers on this site ?

If the site is to expand, then there must be ,(in my useless opinion), more volunteers of a variety of philosophies to create balance and ensure civil conduct. Then the $$$ from advertisers would have a chance to increase. The fact of the matter is ex-jw's go off in all directions, they often become atheists but they also become Catholics, and they become Buddahists, Muslims, Baptists, Anglicans, Evangelicals, Quakers, Methodists, Episcopalians, or Mennonites. Or no religion, but still believe in God.

Statistics ( Cambridge University )show 88% of all people on the planet believe in God and only 12% do not or are undecided. Even 79% of Canadians, although not religious responded they believe in God by a National Post survey. 2007 Gallop Poll said 86% of all Americans believe in God. So to say only atheists are "thinkers" seems to be somewhat out of touch with reality.

Apognophos

We should just grow up and ignore name callers, get a thicker skin.

Actually, no, we shouldn't. The rules on name-calling and provocatory language, found below our posts on every page, should simply be enforced. I don't think I've ever seen a public warning or temp ban handed out on this forum, though they might happen without my knowing it.

cofty

Refutation can be accomplished without name calling. - Paris

In your previous incarnation as VindictiveVillagegirl you were the worse offender for name calling and vitriolic atacks I have ever witnessed in this forum. You were absolutely vile. Time will tell if you have changed but early signs are not promising.

I agree that there is a time to have conversations for the sake of lurkers and new posters where we assume common ground regarding the bible and god in order to demonstrate Watchtower errors. I have done exactly that in at least 4 threads of my own and in during many other conversations.

However that same scrutiny of JW beliefs must continue to be applied rigorously to all propostions. Non-JW superstitions must not have any safe haven in a forum that cares about truth.

There was a smaller forum for a while called JWS that started believer-only and atheist-only sections. It was an unmitigated disaster.

Ideas that are worthy of our support will thrive, they don't need cosseting.

Simon

Simon - By this very statement you reveal your bias.

Well duh ... that was the idea.

Do you think you "pander" to atheists ?

No, they are usually less pig-headed and intollerant and understand the reason behind the guidelines.

Do you think if I said the world is divided between Ukrainians and people "who can think", would I be insulting and biased ? I think many would believe I was insulting the Ukrainians ... As far as my comments on the Ukrainian thread, they were in reference to a Ukraine woman landlady, not directed at anyone here. And all I said was "Have you ever met any Ukrainians, the Russians are doing us a favor"

Really? You can't see that is insulting? Imagine someone saying "Have you ever met any [Jews / Black people / Nigerians] the [Hamas / Ferguson cops / Ebola] are doing us a favor" and then claiming that it's not too bad ...

Heres the problem with this thread: This is clearly NOT a Democracy.

In the same way that no other site on the internet I can think of is a democracy either ... try casting your Google / facebook / MSN / yahoo / whatever vote sometime and see if you can find the polling booth.

Asking for our opinins, suggestions and input is like the Governing Body asking for your opinion. Simon apparently has the power, single-handly, and right, by his sole ownership, to banish, shun and ban anyone here, when and why, he so chooses, without any Democratic process, or even a judicial committee that might be made up of representatives of various persuasions. So it places everyone at his mercy. The banishment is opaque and not up for discussion. Its a disfellowshipping process.

Ah, the old "you are just like the governing body".

Nice try pal, but dead wrong. Trying to equate someone refusing to abide by pretty typical forum rules with being disfellowshipped is very very insulting to people who've been through the latter and lost friends and family as a result. Go get a clue.

I asked for input and ideas because guess what ... it's not a democracy but I do actually want to provide a site with features that make it nicer to use and until you came along we were having a fairly decent exchange of ideas.

DJS

Cofty,

I don't know if Paris is VG, but there are a lot of similarities. Both paint with broad brushes, both have an obsession and hatred for elders and are quick to use it as a strawman and both will completely ignore data that doesn't support their views. Paris: I agree that most people believe in a god of some type; can you agree with the equally excellent empirical data that suggests the more secular and atheistic a country/region/state is the more likely it is functional, educated and intelligent??? Because that's what the data - a lot of it - suggests. That does not mean, Paris, that all theists are stupid or that all atheists are smart. I have qualified this data numerous times. A little humility on your part would be to simply: a. agree; b. be silent; or c. refute it with equally valid empirical data. You haven't done any of those things yet, but those are your only real grown-up alternatives. Ad hominem attacks don't count, but to this point that's all you got. And that too is just like VG.

Or will you attack me that I always have to be right? For a newbie you certainly have canned ad hominem attacks prepared for people you shouldn't know. And don't give me the researching the site crap. I think Cofty is right.

Apognophos

Although I can disagree with "management" about how the forum is run, expecting it to be a democracy really is naive. Simon has every right to determine what kind of a community he wants here. It's his forum. He runs it, and he even wrote the software. If someone doesn't like it, then they can find another JW-related forum. I might even move on myself at some point if the issues that bother me get worse. But one thing I won't do is complain that it's not fair or that it's too much like the Governing Body. It sounds like you've never used another web site before when you say something like that.

bigmac

paris is village girl---? FFS

how about a rule--if any new member has been on before---they HAVE TO declare it upfront--in their opening thread---or face banning if it comes out later.

Your views and ideas on forum areas and organization?

Share this